Identity of a man

[Ivan Hlavanda]

Genesis 1:27 'So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.'

God created everything, thus everything belongs to Him. Humanity as His image were made to reflect His glory back to Him by worshipping Him. But having refused to do so, we have become slaves to sins, unable to escape it's power. God's plan has been to redeem humanity, calling us back to His true worship in a covenant relationship with Him.

We were created to love God, to obey and serve Him, to worship and praise Him. It is who we are, an image of glorious, living God.
But because of our rebellion, sin entered into the world, and shattered this image. But God in His love and mercy sent His Son to call us back to what He made us. And whoever believes, will be restored in the image of God.

Many people believe they are who they are, because God created them that way. For example gay people say they are gay because God created them that way. But that is not true. It is the desire of their hearts. And this is the case for every sinner. But the desires of our hearts do not define who we are. I know there are Christians who believe that as long as we do not act upon our sinful desires, we are not guilty of sin. But that is not true. Even the pharisees thought of this, but Jesus teaches on the sermon on the mount that if we desire to sin, even when we do not act upon it, we are guilty of sin. The problem is our sinful hearts. Our sinful hearts are the reason we are tempted to sin, thus most of the time when we are tempted, it is because we tempt ourselves. Joel 2:13 and rend your hearts and not your garments.” We must both repent of sin and the desire to sin.

If we identify as anything other than image bearers of God, it is idolatry, and we must repent of it. If you identify as a homosexual or transgender, that is not who you are. It is your sinful desires, but they do not make you who you are. Non-Christian religions are also idolatry. For example a person is not a Muslim - it does describe religious commitment, but not ontological reality. It is a false identity, The Gospel proclaims to the devotee of Islam that 'Muslim' is not what he really is. The gospel proclaims to western liberal that 'free' is not who he really is. And the gospel proclaims to the member of gay community that 'gay' is not who he really is. All are images of the triune God. Terribly spoiled images because of our sin, and called by God in His grace to become true, redeemed images of God, the God-man Jesus Christ.

Christians must therefore look at everyone as God's creation, created in His image, and proclaim the good news of Gospel to every non-Christian.

 

[BobRyan]

Many people believe they are who they are, because God created them that way. For example gay people say they are gay because God created them that way. But that is not true. It is the desire of their hearts. And this is the case for every sinner. But the desires of our hearts do not define who we are. I know there are Christians who believe that as long as we do not act upon our sinful desires, we are not guilty of sin.

We all have a sinful nature - and it was not "created by God" rather it is the result of rebellion. God did not create us to be in rebellion but He allowed the free will to rebel against His word and suffer consequences.

But that is not true. Even the pharisees thought of this, but Jesus teaches on the sermon on the mount that if we desire to sin, even when we do not act upon it, we are guilty of sin. The problem is our sinful hearts. Our sinful hearts are the reason we are tempted to sin, thus most of the time when we are tempted, it is because we tempt ourselves. Joel 2:13 and rend your hearts and not your garments.” We must both repent of sin and the desire to sin.

The New Covenant of Jer 31:31-34 is exactly the same - verbatim as in Hebrews 8:6-12
It includes the New Birth of John 3, the new heart as in Rom 2.

But we still have the sinful nature - that we then war against. Rom 7 describes our war with the sinful nature. Rom 8 says "by the Spirit put to death the deeds of the flesh" as an ongoing action not a one time act in the past.

So also in 1 Cor 9 "I buffet my body and make it my slave lest after preaching the Gospel to others I myself should be disqualified from it"

If we identify as anything other than image bearers of God, it is idolatry, and we must repent of it. If you identify as a homosexual or transgender, that is not who you are. It is your sinful desires, but they do not make you who you are. Non-Christian religions are also idolatry.

We can agree there. We sin, we make mistakes but we do so as born-again Christians who war against that sinful nature and we choose to identify as the children of God - not the children of Satan, we don't identify with sin but we declare it to be foreign to the mind of Christ, the new creation, the new heart.

Christians must therefore look at everyone as God's creation, created in His image, and proclaim the good news of Gospel to every non-Christian.

Matt 7 Christ says "not everyone who says to ME Lord, Lord did we not do miracles in YOUR name" -- so who but Christians claim to do such things "in Christ's name" from the POV of Christ in Matt 7 and his listeners?

That means Christians also need the Gospel because the "many" in Matt 7 apparently includes those who claim to be Christians doing work in Christ's name.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

We all have a sinful nature - and it was not "created by God" rather it is the result of rebellion. God did not create us to be in rebellion but He allowed the free will to rebel against His word and suffer consequences.

I completely agree. I did not mean otherwise with what I wrote.

That means Christians also need the Gospel because the "many" in Matt 7 apparently includes those who claim to be Christians doing work in Christ's name.

Matt 7 '21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’' I believe this is the Lord talking about false Christians. They claim to be Christians, they spread the gospel, they go to church...they cast out demons and do wonders but the devil can do these things, but what the devil cannot do is to produce the fruits of the Holy Spirit. That is why the Lord says He never knew them...as in not knowing them intimately (God loves everyone, but He only loves His children intimately).

 

[bling]

I have a Bible study to go to, but quickly:
What do you see as man's earthly objective and why?
If you are using: "To bring glory to God", how can you do better than a tree which brings glory to God and can you bring disgrace to God?

 

[Fireinfolding]

Those who name his name, who say, "Lord Lord" still work iniquity. The warning Paul gives is to depart from working iniquity (so we do not hear the dreaded "depart from me, ye that work iniquity".

Matt 7: 22
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

He would profess to those who name his name (and for what reason he would ask them to depart from him)

Mat 7: 23
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me ye that work iniquity.

Paul warns that those who name His name (as those in the above were doing) to depart from iniquity here

2 Ti 2:19
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity

Paul being aware of what Jesus would say at that day to many which had done those things in his name (while still working iniquity).

Again, Paul says,

Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity

Since those who do not depart from working iniquity (while naming his name) are told

Matt 7: 23
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me ye that work iniquity.

So regardless of Christ not knowing those in the above example (while they name his name while continuing to work iniquity) we can be assured the Lord knoweth them that are his

2 Ti 2:19
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity

So we have depart from iniquity or depart from him ye that work it.

Of Christ it says,

Hebrews 1:9
Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

And also

1 Titus 2:14
Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

 

[Fireinfolding]

So also in 1 Cor 9 "I buffet my body and make it my slave lest after preaching the Gospel to others I myself should be disqualified from it"

That verse right there can even be shown in the gaining of of the world (or others) to the gospel and the castaway. For example

Gaining the world even through preaching the gospel and being a castaway can be shown

Paul says,

1 Cr 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.

1 Cr 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law,
that I might gain them that are under the law;

1 Cr 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,)
that I might gain them that are without law.

1 Cr 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

Just as Jesus said,

Mark 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Or as he stated in Luke saying,

Luke 9:25 For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast away?

And so Paul continues down further (in the verse you posted) saying

1 Cr 9:27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others,
I myself should be a castaway.

So what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world (even by preaching to others) and lose himself, or be cast away?

Paul also warns Timothy to watch both himself and the doctrine and in doing so he would save himself and them that hear him.

1 Timothy 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself,
and them that hear thee.

Of the Pharisees Jesus said, "they say, and do not", and he told them to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.

As is also written

Job 27:8 For what is the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained, when God taketh away his soul?

Or similarly

Mark 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

I have a Bible study to go to, but quickly:
What do you see as man's earthly objective and why?
If you are using: "To bring glory to God", how can you do better than a tree which brings glory to God and can you bring disgrace to God?

A tree wasn't created in God's image, but a man was. A tree therefore can't love and praise God.
Because of our sinful nature, we cannot worship God, we cannot even approach Him. The only way to approach and worship God is in His Son through the Holy Spirit.

 

[bling]

A tree wasn't created in God's image, but a man was. A tree therefore can't love and praise God.
Because of our sinful nature, we cannot worship God, we cannot even approach Him. The only way to approach and worship God is in His Son through the Holy Spirit.

What is the objective was my question.

Everything needs to start with the objective.

The differences and issues begin with misunderstanding of the objective. Most Christians like: Man’s objective is to “bring glory to God” and have scripture references to support that objective, but a person can take any commandment or direction of God given in scripture and have Biblical support for call that command: “Man’s Objective”. We are certainly commanded to do that command, so why is it not man’s objective?

There are the two superior commands which all other commands are subordinate to and combined would be like: “Love God (and secondly others) with all your heart, soul, mind, and energy.” That appears to be man’s “Mission Statement”. The huge problem with fulfilling that “Mission Statement” is the fact that the “Love” needed would have to be huge, way beyond anything man could develop, learn, deserve, earn, pay back, be instinctive to man, or somehow just be forced upon humans.

Thus, the reason you have free will, is because it is required for you to complete your earthly objective.

This messed up world which includes satan roaming around is not here for your pleasure, but to help each of us to become like God Himself in that you have the unique, unbelievable Godly type Love (God himself is Love).

There are just somethings even an all-powerful Creator cannot do (there are things impossible to do), like create another Christ, since Christ has always existed, the big impossibility for us is; create humans with instinctive Godly type Love, since Godly type Love is not instinctive. Godly type love has to be the result of a free will decision by the being, to make it the person’s Love apart from God. In other words: If the Love was in a human from the human’s creation it would be a robotic type love and not a Godly type Love. Also, if God “forces” this Love on a person (Kind a like a shotgun wedding) it would not be “loving” on God’s part and the love forced on the person would not be Godly type Love. This Love has to be the result of a free will moral choice with real alternatives (for humans those alternatives include the perceived pleasures of sin for a season.)

Does sin in some way, serve the nonbeliever in fulfill his objective?

 

[Divide]

A tree wasn't created in God's image, but a man was. A tree therefore can't love and praise God.

But scripture says that all of creation praises God, and that earth groans for the redemption of man. The very stones will lift up praises to God!

Man alone was created in God's image and likeness. That is true. But just because you can't understand the language of trees doesn't mean that they are not praising God. It's just on a different level of existance that's all.

A lady's testimony that I read she said that Jesus joked with her and told her that her cat contemplates God better than she does, lol. He may have been joking but the implication is there!

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

There are the two superior commands which all other commands are subordinate to and combined would be like: “Love God (and secondly others) with all your heart, soul, mind, and energy.

Loving God and loving the neighbrough as self is reflecting God's glory. Images of God love Him and love others (which we fail to do because of our sinful nature) . Obeying God's commandments is reflecting His glory back to Him. I don't see any problem here.

Thus, the reason you have free will

I disagree with you on this. We definitely do not have a free will while in sin, because sin is our captor and we are unable to escape it. Many preach the Gospel as drowning in the ocean, Jesus throws the wheel to save us and up to us to catch it. But that is not what the Bible teaches. We are dead at the bottom of the Ocean and Jesus in His mercy jumps down, gives us life and free us from the sin.

I believe only God has truly a free will.

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

That is true. But just because you can't understand the language of trees doesn't mean that they are not praising God

Trees don't praise God. Nature is God's creation and it sure displays His glory, but neither nature nor animals are created in image of God. Nature doesn't posses soul nor spirit it doesn't praise God it can't. Animals do have a soul sure but not a spirit.

I don't know why people in here bring animals and nature. They are not God's images, but humans are. Thus us being an image of God is our identity, and that was the point of this topic.

 

[bling]

Loving God and loving the neighbrough as self is reflecting God's glory. Images of God love Him and love others (which we fail to do because of our sinful nature) . Obeying God's commandments is reflecting His glory back to Him. I don't see any problem here.





I disagree with you on this. We definitely do not have a free will while in sin, because sin is our captor and we are unable to escape it. Many preach the Gospel as drowning in the ocean, Jesus throws the wheel to save us and up to us to catch it. But that is not what the Bible teaches. We are dead at the bottom of the Ocean and Jesus in His mercy jumps down, gives us life and free us from the sin.

I believe only God has truly a free will.

Do you believe Adam and Eve had, Free will?
First off: Scripture is full of choices people are held responsible for making and it would not be just to hold someone responsible for making a bad choice for which they could not do anything differently. Now, one bad choice can lead to other bad choices which could be unavoidable, but the first bad choice could have been avoided. This is not saying a mature adult without the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit and Godly type Love can keep from all sins since with the knowledge of good and evil there are tons of ways to sin, but any one sin could have been avoided.

Gen. 1-3 Did Adam and Eve have free will?

Exodus 35:29 “All the Israelite men and women who were willing brought to the Lord freewill offerings for all the work the Lord through Moses had commanded them to do.” Are these truly free will offerings?

Jonah 3: 10 “When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.” Did the people of Nineveh change what God said he would do?

Jer. 18: 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

How is this not saying that God’s actions are contingent on the choices of the people?

"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (John 5:39-40). Note that Jesus does not say, "you cannot come", which the Greek does not say here, but, "you refuse to come", in order that you may have eternal life. It was their own rejection of Jesus and the Gospel, that would damn their souls, and not because they were "unable" to make the "choice" themselves.

Christ is God here on earth. The “whomsoever” does not mean only the elect, but lots of people, who then made the choice to accept or reject Christ. "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (John 5:39-40)

To say: “Christ only reveals Himself to those who God have chosen to accept Him”, means God is guilty of not helping others to accept Christ.

John 15: 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.

If they have no free will, they have an excellent excuse for sinning?

There are all the “whosoever” verses making it contingent.

How are robots glorious and could God not make better robots then us?

You feel God needs an audience, that has no choice, but to praise Him?

God has free will so how are humans without free will “in full integrity of God’s image?”

How are robots better then angels?

I do not see how this messed up tragic filled world is glorious if it is not to help willing humans in their fulfilling heir earthly objective, can you help me with that?

According to you Adam and Eve did not have to sin, but were made to sin and get kicked out of the Garden. Was the Garden not a more glorious place then outside the Garden? Was sinless man more glorious then sinful man?

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

Do you believe Adam and Eve had, Free will?

Depends how you define free will. Do I believe they had a choice? Absolutely. Could they have obeyed God and not listen to the snake? Yes.
To me, only God has a free will, because He does not get influenced, but Adam and Eva did, if they had a free will, they would not be influenced. Neither could they chose what happened after they sinned.

Yes, I know many do not defy the free will as this and that's ok. I'm not here to argue against it, my original topic was not about this, but I am stating my opinion on free will.

I do not believe sinners have free will, because they cannot do nothing but sin. Many describe salvation as drowning in the ocean, Jesus throws a lifebuoy and it's our choice if we hold on to it or drown. But we are spiritually dead, unable to save ourselves, we are lying dead at the bottom of the ocean, and Jesus by His mercy jumps into the ocean and gives us life.

 

[bling]

Depends how you define free will. Do I believe they had a choice? Absolutely. Could they have obeyed God and not listen to the snake? Yes.
To me, only God has a free will, because He does not get influenced, but Adam and Eva did, if they had a free will, they would not be influenced. Neither could they chose what happened after they sinned.

A free will choice means you could choose to do either dependent on your will. There will always be “influences” either or both ways, but if the influences are making your choice, then it was not your choice. You are only held accountable for the choice you made. As an example: being drunk could have caused you to run over someone, but you made the choice to drink and drive, even if your friends said: “you will be fine”.

God knows your heart and what you had control over to hold you accountable for.

Adam was heavily influenced by Eve and Eve was influenced by the snake, but she still had a choice in all that.

I do not believe sinners have free will, because they cannot do nothing but sin. Many describe salvation as drowning in the ocean, Jesus throws a lifebuoy and it's our choice if we hold on to it or drown. But we are spiritually dead, unable to save ourselves, we are lying dead at the bottom of the ocean, and Jesus by His mercy jumps into the ocean and gives us life.

Jesus could use any words He wanted to best describe the situation the young prodigal son was in, but chose the word “dead” twice to describe the soon even though the Father knew the son was physically alive. While “dead” (by deity’s definition of death) the young son could still come to his senses and turn to the father, but he did not do it out of a “Love” he did not have but for selfish (sinful) reasons the son turned. Sinners in a dead state (unable to do anything righteous, holy, worthy, honorable) can still for selfish reasons surrender to their hated enemy while they still hate the enemy, but just be willing to accept undeserved pure charity from their enemy (God). God can then shower them with unbelievable gifts, but not because they did anything worthy of anything.

Did the prodigal son do anything to deserve his salvation?

The older son in the Prodigal Son story would have been heavily influenced by the Father to go to the party, so did he have a choice?

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

Sinners in a dead state (unable to do anything righteous, holy, worthy, honorable) can still for selfish reasons surrender to their hated enemy while they still hate the enemy, but just be willing to accept undeserved pure charity from their enemy (God).

“For this reason I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it is given to him by the Father” (John 6:65).

Jesus is saying that, without exception, there is no human being who can come to Him unless it is given to him of the Father. This is an absolute,
No one has the ability to come to Jesus.

'Unless' is a necessary condition. So Jesus is saying that there is a necessary condition that must be met before anyone can come to Him. This verse is teaching is that none of us has the natural ability in and of ourselves to come to Christ unless God does something.

John 6:44: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws Him.” This is not quite as ambiguous. Here, the necessary condition Jesus spells out is that the Father draws somebody.
Our Lord Jesus taught that it is impossible for a human being to come to Him unless that person is drawn by the Father.
But what does it mean that God draws?

The classical Arminian approach, or semi-Pelagian approach, is that nobody can come to Jesus unless the Father entices or woos him. That is usually tied into some notion of prevenient grace, or the influence of the Holy Spirit to woo and entice. The word “draw” in John 6:44 is interpreted to mean “to woo” or “to attract,” just as honey draws bees and lights draw moths. The idea is that the drawing God does is still resistible. According to Arminianism, those who respond to the enticement—to being wooed—are redeemed, and those who do not respond to being drawn are subsequently lost.

Let’s see how this Greek word is used elsewhere in the New Testament. If we turn our Bibles to James 2:6, we will find this same Greek word. The verse says: “But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court?” This verse uses the exact same Greek word that is translated by the word “draw” in John 6. Do you have a guess as to which word that might be? It’s the word “drag.” Now let’s supply the semi-Pelagian interpretation: “But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally woo you into court?”

If that isn’t sufficient with respect to man’s ability, let’s look earlier in John’s Gospel where John describes the encounter that Jesus has with the Pharisee, the theologian, Nicodemus: “Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Truly, truly I say to you, unless (remember that “unless” indicates a necessary condition) one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God’” (John 3:3).

According to Jesus, what has to happen before a person can see the kingdom of God? He has to be born again. Regeneration precedes seeing the kingdom of God. In fact, nobody can see it at all unless they are first born again—regenerate.

John goes on to say that Nicodemus is puzzled: “Nicodemus said to him, ‘How can a man be born when he is old? He can’t enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born, can he?’ Jesus said, ‘Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’” (John 3:4–5). Regeneration is a prerequisite for entering and seeing the kingdom of God.

Semi-Pelagians have people choosing Christ before they are regenerate. Semi-Pelagians have people in their human nature cooperating with prevenient grace, responding to this wooing, enticing, or attracting of God when the Holy Spirit is not yet in them and has not yet regenerated them. The bottom line is that the Arminian position has people who are not yet born again seeing and choosing the King of the kingdom of God. Boggles the mind, doesn’t it?

Regeneration precedes faith. Regeneration is seen as a necessary condition for faith, as Paul teaches in Ephesians 2:4–5. He says that, while we were dead in sin and trespasses, God quickened us, that is, made us alive in Christ—when we were dead!

Paul then tells us, “Therefore it is by grace you are saved, through faith, and that is not of yourselves, but is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8). So we see that faith is the gift of God which is the result of the Spirit’s work of regeneration within us. God Himself supplies the necessary condition to come to Jesus. That’s why it is sola gratia, by grace alone, that we are saved.

Next, Jesus says: “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you that you must be born again” (John 3:6–7). Jesus is saying: “Why should this surprise you? You’re a theologian, Nicodemus. Don’t you understand the fundamental point of man’s fallen nature? That which is born of the flesh is flesh.”

Elsewhere He tells us that the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63). But if we believe that God entices us to Christ and all we have to do in the flesh prior to our regeneration is cooperate or assent—if we can in fact cooperate and assent to prevenient grace—to the end that we enter into the kingdom of God and are redeemed forever, and we’re doing that while we’re still in the flesh, then I ask you: What would the flesh profit? Not just something, but everything—your eternal salvation.

Paul speaks about this in Romans: “For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace because the mind set on the flesh is hostile towards God. For it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do it” (Romans 8:5–7).

Here the Apostle tells us something about man’s moral inability in the flesh. He says that man in his fallen state, in the flesh, is hostile to the law of God. He does not obey the law of God, he is not subject to the law of God, and neither indeed can he be. The Apostle is saying that fallen man cannot obey the law of God and “those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:8).

If God only wooed us to Christ and left it to us to make the final decision, nothing would please Him more than that we would respond positively to that enticement and wooing. But the Apostle tells us that, in the flesh, there is nothing man can do to please God.

 

[Jonathan_Gale]

Genesis 1:27 'So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.'

God created everything, thus everything belongs to Him. Humanity as His image were made to reflect His glory back to Him by worshipping Him. But having refused to do so, we have become slaves to sins, unable to escape it's power. God's plan has been to redeem humanity, calling us back to His true worship in a covenant relationship with Him.

We were created to love God, to obey and serve Him, to worship and praise Him. It is who we are, an image of glorious, living God.
But because of our rebellion, sin entered into the world, and shattered this image. But God in His love and mercy sent His Son to call us back to what He made us. And whoever believes, will be restored in the image of God.

Many people believe they are who they are, because God created them that way. For example gay people say they are gay because God created them that way. But that is not true. It is the desire of their hearts. And this is the case for every sinner. But the desires of our hearts do not define who we are. I know there are Christians who believe that as long as we do not act upon our sinful desires, we are not guilty of sin. But that is not true. Even the pharisees thought of this, but Jesus teaches on the sermon on the mount that if we desire to sin, even when we do not act upon it, we are guilty of sin. The problem is our sinful hearts. Our sinful hearts are the reason we are tempted to sin, thus most of the time when we are tempted, it is because we tempt ourselves. Joel 2:13 and rend your hearts and not your garments.” We must both repent of sin and the desire to sin.

If we identify as anything other than image bearers of God, it is idolatry, and we must repent of it. If you identify as a homosexual or transgender, that is not who you are. It is your sinful desires, but they do not make you who you are. Non-Christian religions are also idolatry. For example a person is not a Muslim - it does describe religious commitment, but not ontological reality. It is a false identity, The Gospel proclaims to the devotee of Islam that 'Muslim' is not what he really is. The gospel proclaims to western liberal that 'free' is not who he really is. And the gospel proclaims to the member of gay community that 'gay' is not who he really is. All are images of the triune God. Terribly spoiled images because of our sin, and called by God in His grace to become true, redeemed images of God, the God-man Jesus Christ.

Christians must therefore look at everyone as God's creation, created in His image, and proclaim the good news of Gospel to every non-Christian.

"Gay people" is a focus group created for conflicts, it's a Marxist strategy to destablize America, it's typical divide and conquer. In other countries Marxists mobolized the poor against the rich, the didn't work well in America, so they opted for "cultural Marxism" by mobolizing all these "oppressed" focus groups against the "patriarchy", the "oppressors". In the past there was some legitimacy in that, there was real oppression and discrimination against women, blacks, Jews and others, they deserved to be heard; however, "gays", "trans", "pedos" these days are manufactured focus groups, those are not real identities and they have no legitimate claims, they're nothing but pawns used by Satan to attack the church and the Christian culture. You either accept them and compromise your faith, or reject them and get labelled as a "bigot". God never created anybody to be "gay", it's a particularly nasty sinful behavior, which should not have been recognized as an identity in the first place. It is really distrubing that people identigy themselves by their gender, race and "sexual orientation" before job title, birthplace and familial relations.

 

[bling]

“For this reason I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it is given to him by the Father” (John 6:65).

Jesus is saying that, without exception, there is no human being who can come to Him unless it is given to him of the Father. This is an absolute,
No one has the ability to come to Jesus.

'Unless' is a necessary condition. So Jesus is saying that there is a necessary condition that must be met before anyone can come to Him. This verse is teaching is that none of us has the natural ability in and of ourselves to come to Christ unless God does something.

John 6:44: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws Him.” This is not quite as ambiguous. Here, the necessary condition Jesus spells out is that the Father draws somebody.
Our Lord Jesus taught that it is impossible for a human being to come to Him unless that person is drawn by the Father.
But what does it mean that God draws?

The classical Arminian approach, or semi-Pelagian approach, is that nobody can come to Jesus unless the Father entices or woos him. That is usually tied into some notion of prevenient grace, or the influence of the Holy Spirit to woo and entice. The word “draw” in John 6:44 is interpreted to mean “to woo” or “to attract,” just as honey draws bees and lights draw moths. The idea is that the drawing God does is still resistible. According to Arminianism, those who respond to the enticement—to being wooed—are redeemed, and those who do not respond to being drawn are subsequently lost.

Let’s see how this Greek word is used elsewhere in the New Testament. If we turn our Bibles to James 2:6, we will find this same Greek word. The verse says: “But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court?” This verse uses the exact same Greek word that is translated by the word “draw” in John 6. Do you have a guess as to which word that might be? It’s the word “drag.” Now let’s supply the semi-Pelagian interpretation: “But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally woo you into court?”

If that isn’t sufficient with respect to man’s ability, let’s look earlier in John’s Gospel where John describes the encounter that Jesus has with the Pharisee, the theologian, Nicodemus: “Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Truly, truly I say to you, unless (remember that “unless” indicates a necessary condition) one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God’” (John 3:3).

According to Jesus, what has to happen before a person can see the kingdom of God? He has to be born again. Regeneration precedes seeing the kingdom of God. In fact, nobody can see it at all unless they are first born again—regenerate.

John goes on to say that Nicodemus is puzzled: “Nicodemus said to him, ‘How can a man be born when he is old? He can’t enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born, can he?’ Jesus said, ‘Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’” (John 3:4–5). Regeneration is a prerequisite for entering and seeing the kingdom of God.

Semi-Pelagians have people choosing Christ before they are regenerate. Semi-Pelagians have people in their human nature cooperating with prevenient grace, responding to this wooing, enticing, or attracting of God when the Holy Spirit is not yet in them and has not yet regenerated them. The bottom line is that the Arminian position has people who are not yet born again seeing and choosing the King of the kingdom of God. Boggles the mind, doesn’t it?

Regeneration precedes faith. Regeneration is seen as a necessary condition for faith, as Paul teaches in Ephesians 2:4–5. He says that, while we were dead in sin and trespasses, God quickened us, that is, made us alive in Christ—when we were dead!

Paul then tells us, “Therefore it is by grace you are saved, through faith, and that is not of yourselves, but is the gift of God” (Eph. 2:8). So we see that faith is the gift of God which is the result of the Spirit’s work of regeneration within us. God Himself supplies the necessary condition to come to Jesus. That’s why it is sola gratia, by grace alone, that we are saved.

Next, Jesus says: “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you that you must be born again” (John 3:6–7). Jesus is saying: “Why should this surprise you? You’re a theologian, Nicodemus. Don’t you understand the fundamental point of man’s fallen nature? That which is born of the flesh is flesh.”

Elsewhere He tells us that the flesh profits nothing (John 6:63). But if we believe that God entices us to Christ and all we have to do in the flesh prior to our regeneration is cooperate or assent—if we can in fact cooperate and assent to prevenient grace—to the end that we enter into the kingdom of God and are redeemed forever, and we’re doing that while we’re still in the flesh, then I ask you: What would the flesh profit? Not just something, but everything—your eternal salvation.

Paul speaks about this in Romans: “For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace because the mind set on the flesh is hostile towards God. For it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do it” (Romans 8:5–7).

Here the Apostle tells us something about man’s moral inability in the flesh. He says that man in his fallen state, in the flesh, is hostile to the law of God. He does not obey the law of God, he is not subject to the law of God, and neither indeed can he be. The Apostle is saying that fallen man cannot obey the law of God and “those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:8).

If God only wooed us to Christ and left it to us to make the final decision, nothing would please Him more than that we would respond positively to that enticement and wooing. But the Apostle tells us that, in the flesh, there is nothing man can do to please God.

In the banquet parables the master, ruler or father give as strong an invitation as they can, but they are not kidnapping the person against the person’s will to go to the party.

We give up, wimp out and surrender to our enemy while still hating our enemy (like good soldiers of satan would do). We are coming not out of Love for our enemy, but to selfishly (thus sinfully) possibly obtain some kind of undeserved pure charitable livable life. Selfishness is never pleasing to God, but God does allow it.

Would it please God and be Loving on God’s part to put a shotgun to our head to force us to accept His Love and thus have a “love” like His Love? A shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun would not be “Loving” on God’s part and the “love” we received would not be Godly type Love. To truly be our Love it has to come as a result of a free will choice on our part.

Just because you act like the prodigal son and humbly go to the Father seeking undeserved pure charity, does not mean the father has to do anything for you (you deserve nothing). Jesus is at the party and we have lots of Banquets described in parables where people are strongly invited, yet some will refuse, but all that go to the banquet were strongly invited by the Father/Master/ruler.

You have the ability to accept or refuse the father’s invitation, just like the older son in the prodigal son parable, what more would you have the father do to get the older son to come to the party?

 

[Ivan Hlavanda]

In the banquet parables the master, ruler or father give as strong an invitation as they can, but they are not kidnapping the person against the person’s will to go to the party.

We give up, wimp out and surrender to our enemy while still hating our enemy (like good soldiers of satan would do). We are coming not out of Love for our enemy, but to selfishly (thus sinfully) possibly obtain some kind of undeserved pure charitable livable life. Selfishness is never pleasing to God, but God does allow it.

Would it please God and be Loving on God’s part to put a shotgun to our head to force us to accept His Love and thus have a “love” like His Love? A shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun would not be “Loving” on God’s part and the “love” we received would not be Godly type Love. To truly be our Love it has to come as a result of a free will choice on our part.

Just because you act like the prodigal son and humbly go to the Father seeking undeserved pure charity, does not mean the father has to do anything for you (you deserve nothing). Jesus is at the party and we have lots of Banquets described in parables where people are strongly invited, yet some will refuse, but all that go to the banquet were strongly invited by the Father/Master/ruler.

You have the ability to accept or refuse the father’s invitation, just like the older son in the prodigal son parable, what more would you have the father do to get the older son to come to the party?

Again, no one comes to Christ unless the Father brings him/her. Romans 9 is another example 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. - it does not depends on us but on God alone. And God does not get influenced by us. He saves whom He wants to save.

We could probably go back and forth on this, but I do not think we will agree. If you have a spare time and you want, I recommend this sermon

God bless

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Election is when the Church receives your name as a candidate or catechumen to be received into the Catholic Church at the Easter Vigil on Holy Saturday.

 

[bling]

Again, no one comes to Christ unless the Father brings him/her. Romans 9 is another example 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. - it does not depends on us but on God alone. And God does not get influenced by us. He saves whom He wants to save.

We could probably go back and forth on this, but I do not think we will agree. If you have a spare time and you want, I recommend this sermon

God bless

Romans 9

Paul uses two teaching methods throughout Romans even secular philosophy classes will use Romans as the best example of these methods. Paul does an excellent job of building one premise on the previous premises to develop his final conclusions. Paul uses an ancient form of rhetoric known as diatribe (imaginary debate) asking questions and most of the time giving a strong “By no means” and then goes on to explain “why not”. Paul’s method goes beyond just a general diatribe and follows closely to the diatribes used in the individual laments in the Psalms and throughout the Old Testament, which the Jewish Christians would have known extensively. These “questions or comments” are given by an “imaginary” student making it more a dialog with the readers (students) and not just a “sermon”.

The main topic repeated extensively in Romans is the division in the Christian house churches in Rome between the Jews and Gentile Christians. You can just look up how many times Jews and gentiles are referred to see this as a huge issue.



The main question (a diatribe question) in Romans 9 Paul addresses is God being fair or just Rms. 9: 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!



This will take some explaining, since just prior in Romans 9, Paul went over some history of God’s dealings with the Israelites that sounds very “unjust” like “loving Jacob and hating Esau” before they were born, but remember in all of Paul’s diatribes he begins before, just after or before and just after with strong support for the wrong answer (this makes it more of a debate and giving the opposition the first shot as done in all diatribes).

Some “Christians” do not seem to understand how Paul, uses diatribes and think, since he just showed God being “unjust” and saying God is “not unjust” that God has a special God definition of “just”, making God “just” by His standard and appearing totally unjust by human standards. God is not a hypocrite and does not redefine what He told us to be true.

Who in Rome would be having a “problem” with God choosing to work with Isaac and Jacob instead of Ishmael and Esau? Would the Jewish Christian have a problem with this or would it be the Gentile Christians?

Think further about this: The Jews (thinking the gentiles were dogs) would support their distant for the Gentiles by pointing out to them how God: loved Jacob, a Jew, and hated Esau, a gentile, plus Jacob and Ishmael, Moses and Pharoah and with other OT true stories. Those true stories would thus be formular to both Jewish and Gentile Christians, showing the Jews were special and the ZGentiles were just common.

If God treaded you as privileged and special, would you have a problem or would you have a problem if you were treated seemingly as common, while others were treated with honor for no apparent reason?

This is the issue and Paul will explain over the rest of Romans 9-11.

Paul is specific with the issue Rms. 9: 19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”

The KJV translates the Greek word τιμὴν (timēn) honorable and the Greek word ἀτιμίαν (atimian) dishonorable, but later translations use special and common, so this can be confusing.

The Jews were created in a special honorable position that would bring forth the Messiah and everyone else was common in comparison (the Gentiles).

How do we know Paul is specifically addressing the Jew/Gentile issue? Rms. 9: 30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.

Paul is showing from the position of being made “common” vessels by God the Gentiles had an advantage over the Israelites (vessels of honor) that had the Law, since the Law became a stumbling stone to them. They both needed faith to rely on God’s Love to forgive them.

Without going into the details of Romans 9-11 we conclude with this diatribe question: Romans 11: 11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!

The common vessels (gentiles) and the vessels of honor (Jews) are equal individually in what is really significant when it comes to salvation, so God is not being unjust or unfair with either group.

If there is still a question about who is being addressed in this section of Rms. 9-11, Paul tells us: Rms. 11: 13 I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I take pride in my ministry 14 in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.

Rm 9:22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

This verse is not saying all the “vessels” created for a “common purpose” were created for destruction (they were not made from the start by the Potter “clay pigeons”). Everything that leaves the potter’s shop is of great quality. Those vessels for destruction can come from either the common group or the honor group, but God is being patient with them that will eventually be destroyed. The vessels God does develop great wrath against, will be readied for destruction, but how did they become worthy of destruction, since they left the potter’s shop with his mark on them? Any vessel (honorable or common) that becomes damaged is not worthy of the Potter’s signature and He would want it destroyed.

To understand this as Common vessels and special vessels look at the same idea using the same Greek words of Paul in 2 Tim 2: 20. There Paul even points out the common can become the honored vessel.

Just because Paul uses a Potter as being God in his analogy and Jerimiah 18 uses a Potter as being God in his analogy, does not mean the analogies are conveying the exact same analogy. Jerimiah is talking about clay on the potter’s wheel being change while still being malleable clay (which fits the changing of Israel), but Paul is talking about two finished pots (vessels) so they cannot both be Israel, the clay is the same for both and the clay is not changing the outcome of the pot. The two pots (vessels) are completed and a person is asking “Why did you make me like this”, so it is about “how a person is made (born)” and not a nation.

Since Jerimiah talks only about one pot on the wheel changing and Paul is talking about two kinds of completed pots (vessels), who are the two different pots?



Paul is saying in 2 Tim 2: 21 even after leaving the shop the common vessels can cleanse themselves and thus become instruments for a special purpose. So, who is the common vessel and who is the special vessel in this analogy?

That is a short explanation, since you really need to study all of Romans especially chapters 9, 10 and 11. Also please look at individual laments in the Psalms and diatribes in general, I really cut those short.



The Jews were given a higher position on earth, but with that position came added responsibility which they poorly handled. I do not see them in Rome having any advantage over the gentile Christians, but what do you think?

Added:

2 Tim. 2:20

The Greek word for Special purpose is τιμὴν (timēn) and the Greek would for common purpose is ἀτιμίαν (atimian) are the same Greek words used by Paul in contrasting special and common in Ro. 9:21

Does not the potter have the right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special occasions and another for common use?

There are no dishonorable vessels in the rich man’s house.

Saying anything dishonorable left the Potters shop is a disgrace to God since everything He made is “very good” for the purpose it was designed to do.

Paul also says 2 Tim. 2: 21 Those who cleanse themselves from the latter will be instruments for special purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work.

This says even though you were common to begin with if you cleanse yourself, you can become honorable (useful for a special purpose).

Paul in Ro. 9 is using the same analogy of humans starting out for a special purpose like the Jews and a common purpose like the Gentiles, but they can all become special vessels for God (2 Tim. 2:21), so who would God want destroyed?